In March 2000 “the people” of California passed the Knight Initiative, codifying bigotry into California law (though not into California’s Constitution) by preventing the recogntion of same-sex marriages in California.
More than five years have passed since then.
Why is five years important?
Simple: because the term of office for the California Assembly is two years and the term of office for the California Senate is four years.
So every single legislator involved in the same-sex marriage vote Tuesday night, regardless of how they voted, was elected by “the people” after the Knight Initiative.
Clearly, “the people” changed their minds.
Therefore, the idea that this “activist legislature” acted contrary to the will of “the people” is the worst kind of nonsense.
“The people” who elected these politicians outrank “the people” who voted for the Knight Initiative, since they are the more recent iteration of “the people.” Surely the will of “today’s people” has priority over the will of “yesterday’s people.”
That is, of course, assuming you think it is intellectually honest, and politically benign, to refer to “the people” when you really mean “a majority of the people.”
And that is also, of course, assuming you believe that equal rights and basic human dignities should be left to the will of “the people” in the first place.
And that is still also, of course, assuming you believe that “the people” is even a valid political concept and that there can be such a thing as “the people’s rights” as opposed to individual rights.
That’s the problem with unbridled majoritarianism (i.e., mob rule) — the mob can and usually does turn on itself in the end.
—
Meanwhile, what a pathetic wimp (girly-man?) Arnold Schwarzenegger is proving to be. “Leave it to the courts”? Okay, fine — but only after the legislative process has run its course. He went out of his way to get the job of California Governor, and now he wants to pick and choose which issues he’ll actually bother governing? Coward.
This fool is like a little … er, big … Napoleon — stir up the people to overthrow the existing power structure, only to exactly replicate it yourself after you’ve won. Schwarzenegger threw the bums out, only to become an even worse bum himself.
Either sign the law or veto it — but do so because it’s what you believe is the right thing to do. Don’t just be another hack politician.
UPDATE: Arnold chose the “Conan the Barbarian” role by invoking the “will of [some random iteration of] the will of [some of] the people [of the past]” route.
As I said — just like Napoleon.
I wonder whether Schwarzenegger believes the Anschluss should have been put to a vote of Germans and not just Austrians.
Similar thoughts from FARB, purple america, Dolphin, PurpleScarf. Also, Republic of T. has a good round-up of rationalizations from the various self-loathing gay conservative bloggers.
3 responses so far ↓
Link John // Sep 7, 2005 at 4:36 pm
If the Governor signs this bill, is that not the end of the line as far as the courts are concerned? Who could challenge the law? Wno would have standing?
Also, is it not true that a bill that alters a law passed by initiative petition must be sent to voters directly for approval?
Link KipEsquire // Sep 7, 2005 at 4:44 pm
Also, is it not true that a bill that alters a law passed by initiative petition must be sent to voters directly for approval?
I have seen references to this on other blogs. Whatever the actual rule, it is a mere procedural question local to California. It does not affect my thesis that "the will of the people" is a dangerous fiction regardless of who invokes it.
Link Tom Chatt // Sep 8, 2005 at 12:21 pm
Yes, it is true that an initiative statute cannot be changed by the legislature, but must be changed by the voters. The new law in California, on a technicality, does not conflict with the Knight Initiative. The Knight Initiative amended the section of Calif Code that deals with California's recognition of marriages from other jurisdictions. The new law amends the section of the Code that deals with qualifications for marriage within California. If the new law goes into effect, California will be in the strange position of allowing same-sex marriages within the state, but not recognizing same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions such as Massachusetts.